Abstract
The failure to translate health research findings into practice costs lives. Less than 20% of research on the efficacy of new interventions or practices finds its way into ongoing clinical practice, and it takes between 15 and 20 years for this translation to occur. Translational research involves a series and combination of methods to achieve the nonlinear process of progressing basic scientific discovery to a healthcare intervention, to the assessment of efficacy of that intervention for health outcomes in trial groups, to the determination of effectiveness of the intervention in the broader population, and finally to the sustainable adoption of the effective practice at population scale. More simply put, translational research is the movement of basic science into human research and human research into healthcare practices: the former sometimes referred to as translational research and the latter as implementation research. This chapter will provide some clarity to the complex labeling and conceptualizing of translational and implementation research and their methodological frameworks including the characteristics and key procedures of research methods that facilitate quality and timely translation of interventions and programs, including hybrid and reflexive research designs, diffusion and dissemination research, and decision-making and policy research.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aarons GA, Green AE, Palinkas LA, Self-Brown S, Whitaker DJ, Lutzker JR, … Chaffin MJ. Dynamic adaptation process to implement an evidence-based child maltreatment intervention. Implement Sci. 2012;7(1):32.
Atkins MS, Frazier SL, Cappella E. Hybrid research models: natural opportunities for examining mental health in context. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2006;13(1):105–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00012.x.
Australian Government. National Innovation and Science Agenda: assessing the engagement and impact of university research. 2017. Retrieved from https://www.innovation.gov.au/page/measuring-impact-and-engagement-university-research
Bertram RM, Blase KA, Fixsen DL. Improving programs and outcomes: implementation frameworks and organization change. Res Soc Work Pract. 2015;25(4):477–87.
Blamey A, Mackenzie M. Theories of change and realistic evaluation: peas in a pod or apples and oranges. Evaluation. 2007;13(4):439–55.
Blase K, Kiser L, Van Dyke M. The hexagon tool: exploring context. 2013. Retrieved from http://implementation.fpg.unc.edu/resources/hexagon-tool-exploring-context
Bopp M, Saunders RP, Lattimore D. The tug-of-war: fidelity versus adaptation throughout the health promotion program life cycle. J Prim Prev. 2013;34(3):193–207.
Brownson RC, Colditz GA, Proctor EK. Dissemination and implementation research in health. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012.
Carroll C, Patterson M, Wood S, Booth A, Rick J, Balain S. A conceptual framework for implementation fidelity. Implement Sci. 2007;2(1):40.
Castro FG, Barrera M, Martinez CR. The cultural adaptation of prevention interventions: resolving tensions between fidelity and fit. Prev Sci. 2004;5(1):41–5. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:PREV.0000013980.12412.cd.
Daro D, Boller K, Hart B. Implementation in early childhood home visiting: successes meeting staffing standards, challenges hitting dosage and duration targets. 2014. Retrieved from Chapin Hall.
Feldstein AC, Glasgow RE. A practical, robust implementation and sustainability model (PRISM) for integrating research findings into practice. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34(4):228–43.
Fixsen DL, Naoom SF, Blase KA, Friedman RM, Wallace F. Implementation research: a synthesis of the literature. 2005. Retrieved from Tampa.
Flay BR. Efficacy and effectiveness trials (and other phases of research) in the development of health promotion programs. Prev Med. 1986;15(5):451–74.
Flay BR, Biglan A, Boruch RF, Castro FG, Gottfredson D, Kellam S, … Ji P. Standards of evidence: criteria for efficacy, effectiveness and dissemination. Prev Sci. 2005;6(3):151–73.
Garland AF, Hurlburt MS, Hawley KM. Examining psychotherapy processes in a services research context. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2006;13(1):30–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00004.x.
Glasgow RE, Magid D, Beck A, Ritzwoller D, Estabrooks P. Practical clinical trials for translating research to practice: design and measurement recommendations. Med Care. 2005;43(6):551.
Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, MacDonald S, Delva D, Birtwhistle R, … Seguin R. Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:28.
Gomby DS. Understanding evaluations of home visitation programs. Future Child. 1999;9(1):27–43.
Gomby DS. The promise and limitations of home visiting: implementing effective programs. Child Abuse Negl. 2007;31(8):793–9.
Green LW. From research to “best practices” in other settings and populations. Am J Health Behavior. 2001;25(3):165–178.
Green LW. Making research relevant: if it is an evidence-based practice, where’s the practice-based evidence? Fam Pract. 2008;25:i20–4.
Green LW, Glasgow RE. Evaluating the relevance, generalization, and applicability of research. Issues in external validation and translation methodology. Eval Health Prof. 2006;29(1):126–53.
Green LW, Kreuter MW. Health program planning: an educational and ecological approach. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2005.
Green LW, Ottoson JM, Garcia C, Hiatt RA. Diffusion theory and knowledge dissemination, utilization, and integration in public health. Annu Rev Public Health. 2009;30:151–74.
Hohmann AA, Shear MK. Community-based intervention research: coping with the “noise” of real life in study design. Am J Psychiatry. 2002;159(2):201–7. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.159.2.201.
Institute of Medicine. The CTSA Program at NIH: opportunities for advancing clinical and translational research. 2013. Retrieved from Washington, DC.
Kardamanidis K, Kemp L, Schmied V. Uncovering psychosocial needs: perspectives of Australian child and family health nurses in a sustained home visiting trial. Contemp Nurse. 2009;33(1):50–8.
Kemp L. Adaptation and fidelity: a recipe analogy for achieving both in population scale implementation. Prev Sci. 2016;17(4):429–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-016-0642-7.
Kemp L, Harris E. The challenges of establishing and researching a sustained nurse home visiting programme within the universal child and family health service system. J Res Nurs. 2012;17(2):127–38. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987111432228.
Kemp L, Anderson T, Travaglia J, Harris E. Sustained nurse home visiting in early childhood: exploring Australian nursing competencies. Public Health Nurs. 2005;22(3):254–9.
Kemp L, Eisbacher L, McIntyre L, O’Sullivan K, Taylor J, Clark T, Harris E. Working in partnership in the antenatal period: what do child and family health nurses do? Contemp Nurse. 2006;23(2):312–20.
Latimore AD, Burrell L, Crowne S, Ojo K, Cluxton-Keller F, Gustin S, … Duggan A. Exploring multilevel factors for family engagement in home visiting across two national models. Prev Sci. 2017; 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-017-0767-3.
Moore JE, Bumbarger BK, Cooper BR. Examining adaptations of evidence-based programs in natural contexts. J Prim Prev. 2013;34(3):147–61.
Morris ZS, Wooding S, Grant J. The answer is 17 years, what is the question: understanding time lags in translational research. J R Soc Med. 2011;104(12):510–20.
Mowbray CT, Holter MC, Teague GB, Bybee D. Fidelity criteria: development, measurement, and validation. Am J Eval. 2003;24(3):315–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-2140(03)00057-2.
National Institutes of Health. Definitions under Subsection 1 (Research Objectives), Section I (Funding Opportunity Description), Part II (Full Text of Announcement), of RFA-RM-07-007: Institutional Clinical and Translational Science Award (U54). 2007. Retrieved from http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/rfa-files/RFA-RM-07-007.html
RE-AIM. 2017. Retrieved from http://re-aim.org/about/applying-the-re-aim-framework/
Robling M, Bekkers MJ, Bell K, Butler CC, Cannings-John R, Channon S, … Torgerson D. Effectiveness of a nurse-led intensive home-visitation programme for first-time teenage mothers (building blocks): a pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10014):146–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00392-X.
Thase ME. A tale of two paradigms. Clin Psychol Sci Pract. 2006;13(1):94–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2006.00010.x.
Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, Treweek S, Furberg CD, Altman DG, … Chalkidou K. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:464–75.
US Department of Health and Human Services. Finding the balance: program fidelity and adaptation in substance abuse prevention: a state-of-the-art review. Rockville: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention; 2002.
Woolf SH. The meaning of translational research and why it matters. JAMA. 2008;299(2):211–3.
Zapart S, Knight J, Kemp L. ‘It was easier because I had help’: mothers’ reflections on the long-term impact of sustained nurse home visiting. Matern Child Health J. 2016;20(1):196–204. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10995-015-1819-6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this entry
Cite this entry
Kemp, L. (2018). Translational Research: Bridging the Chasm Between New Knowledge and Useful Knowledge. In: Liamputtong, P. (eds) Handbook of Research Methods in Health Social Sciences . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_72-1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2779-6_72-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-2779-6
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-2779-6
eBook Packages: Springer Reference Social SciencesReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences